Video Asylum

• Re: S-Video Vs. Component - croft 19:38:25 02/10/04 (0)
  In Reply to: S-Video Vs. Component posted by ChicagoT5 on February 08, 2004 at 10:55:49:

  Hi,
  I have 5 dvd players and also a home cinema system.
  I find S-VHS works best with VHS playback.
  Component for DVD.
  I found an amzing website that went into extrordinary lenghts on what each format does and why,I will try and hunt this out.
  I can remember the info stated that Component was created with DVD in mind from day one beacuse its the ideal output medium for MPEG playback,It carries far less decoding material.
  An svhs lead run from a DVD will have to convert the signal a few times.

  I find component flaws shvs on DVD playback,I have a 100 inch screen being fed into a Barco CRT projector,Also a 32" Toshiba rear projection tv set.

  Also games machines look stunning in Component,Espeahially the xbox.
  If i had to choose Component wins hands down.
  regards,
  Ian.

  
  
  

  ---
• Thanks For The Info - ChicagoT5 09:41:42 02/09/04 (1)
  In Reply to: S-Video Vs. Component posted by ChicagoT5 on February 08, 2004 at 10:55:49:

  I am building a new set up with a projector, and I wanted to avoid component for simplicity (since my receiver can not conver S to Component, nor can it display it's OSD on component). However, based on your feedback, I will run component directly from the DVD to the projector, and an S-Video from the receiver to the projector.

  
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Thanks For The Info - monk 23:40:53 02/09/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Thanks For The Info posted by ChicagoT5 on February 09, 2004 at 09:41:42:

    Yes, the solutions you're looking at are not the ideal, but they are the best you can make of the situation.

    It's a problem caused by the Video technology leaping over that in the average receivers.

    There are receivers that can handle the S-Video/Composite upconversion to the Component kind of video signal and one's that will switch between component sources, but they'd cost you in the region of $600 to $700 (?) used or about $800 or more new (thinking here of the Denon AVR-3803, which can do what you need).

    Another option is to get a seprate box to do the Video switching. Not sure what the best one would be, but there are machines that do this (some from pro world),...search hear and the AVS_Forum.com .

    If you buy a progressive scan DVD player,...you'll only be able to use the progressive output if you use Component cables (otherwise you're using different video chips in the DVD player and may be missing a lot of why people might like that particular DVD player.

    Depending on the projector/TV, ...you can do OK feeding it a lesser signal, ...if you luck out and the TV/projector has excellent video processing on it's own (can be done in either the DVD player/source and/or in the TV,...best is doing it in the DVD usually. Very best is DVI digital output to a projector/TV that can take the video stream as digital signal (i.e., no conversion from Digital to analogue in the DVD player,...followed with Analogue to Digital to Ananlogue again inside the projector. DVI would allow digial output then just the one digital to analogue conversion , happening inside the projector.

    Having said all that, running the seperate cables will be a good solution. Picture will actually be better going direct to the projector from the source and not having to get routed through the projector.

    M.
    
    

    ---
• Re: S-Video Vs. Component - monk 05:17:54 02/09/04 (0)
  In Reply to: S-Video Vs. Component posted by ChicagoT5 on February 08, 2004 at 10:55:49:

  Short answer is that Componet connection bests S-Video.

  However, it does depend on the TV and source. If you have an older interlaced only TV that's not too big, then the difference is small.

  If you have a source and TV capable of Progressive Scan or higher video qulaity standards (HDTV, 720P, 1080i etc.), then Component is the only way to go.

  Few years ago I had a 40" interlaced widescreen Toshiba, one of the first with Component inputs. Because it wasn't huge and because it could only take an interlaced signal, was no big deal to use either.

  Now I use a front projector and 8ft screen and watch 480P, 576P and HDTV (as well as regular TV) and the Component connection is the only way to go.

  So Components better, but you need modern video gear to really appreciate the differnece. If your sets older, no need to bother.
  
  

  ---
• Component is better - John C. - Aussie 15:25:45 02/08/04 (0)
  In Reply to: S-Video Vs. Component posted by ChicagoT5 on February 08, 2004 at 10:55:49:

  I had a long s-video run (Monster cable) and it was replaced by Audioquest component cable -> significantly better. Not sure about how it would be for shorter runs but component is generally accepted as better. However how much better could depend upon both the quality of output from the player as well as cable type.

  John
  
  Interesting times
  
  

  ---

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---